ISSN 2239-978X Journal of Educational and Social Research Vol. 3 (1) January 2013 States and Local Government Areas Creation as a Strategy of National Integration or Disintegration in Nigeria Bassey, Antigha Okon #!230#0Q#.02+#,2-$-!'-*-%7 !3*27-$-!'*!'#,, 4#01'27-$* 0 TTTWWV[* 0$TT– Nigeria E-mail: &X)Z&--T!-+, &,#SV^VYY[Z_YY\ Omono, Cletus Ekok #!230#0Q#.02+#,2-$-!'-*-%7 !3*27-$-!'*!'#,, 4#01'27-$* 0 Bisong, Patrick Owan #!230#0Q#.02+#,2-$-!'-*-%7 Facult$-!'*!'#,, 4#01'27-$* 0 Bassey, Umo Antigha !3*27-$1"3!2'-, ,'4#01'27-$* 0 Doi: 10.5901/jesr.2013.v3n1p237 Abstract 3&'1..#0#6+',#1122#1,"*-!*%-4#0,+#,20#1!0#2'-,',5'%#0'1-,#-$2&+(-01202#%'#1of #,130',%52'-,*',2#%02'-,T3&#,*71'15 1#"-,1#""2- 2',#"$0-+2#6 )1,"-2&#0 0#20'#4#" +2#0'*1T 3&# 1!-.# -$ 2&# ..#0 -&#0 2&, 2&# "!2'-,Q !-4#01R !-,!#.23* ,*71'1 -$ 40' *#1R 0#4'#5 -$ *-!* %-4#0,+#,2 0#as and states creation in Nigeria, rationale for States and Local 90,+#,21!0#R2&#-0#2'!*$"R!-,1#/#,!#1R!-,!*31'-,"0#!-++#,"-,T<2#0!0'2'!* #6+',2'-, -$ 2&# !-,1#/#,!#1 -$ !0#2'-, -$ 122#1 "*-!*%-4#0,+#,2 0#15hich include structural imbalance in Nigeria socio-1203!230#R.#0.#232'-,-$+',-0'27"-+',2'-,Q!-,2',3-311203%%*#$-0 national resources in terms of sharing national revenue and creation of consciousness among ethnic nationalities. State and Local government creation rather promotes National disintegration. The conclusion of &'1 ..#0 2&#0#$-0# "#4'2#1 1'%,'$'!,2*7 $0-+ 2&# ',2#,"" $3,!2'-, -$ 122# !0#2'-, 1 #6!2#" 7 2&# %'22-01T3&'1..#0381$3,!2'-,*&',,*8g state and local government creation in Nigeria "'2'10#!-++#""2&2&##"0*9-4#0,+#,21&-3*"',20-"3!#"-+'!'*'07.-*'!72-1-*4#2&#.0- *#+ of non-indigenes and minorities. Keywords: State, Local Government Area, National integration, disintegration and creation 1. Introduction The creation of States and Local Government Areas in Nigeria is a unique future of our Federal System of Government. Federalism according to Tamuno (1998:13) is the form of Government where the component units of a political organization participate in sharing powers and functions in a cooperative manner through the combined forces of ethnic pluralism and cultural diversity among others, which tend to pull people apart. 237 ISSN 2239-978X Journal of Educational and Social Research Vol. 3 (1) January 2013 Nigeria is a country with over 374 ethnic groups, over 400 distinct languages (as against dialects), diverse belief systems, customs and institutions (Tamuno, 1998:22). The diversity identified calls for a purposeful action to create a viable entity. This option is rooted in the focus of this paper on "National Integration". Nigeria in all respect is a typical example of a plural society considering the socio-cultural heterogeneity of its constituent parts. Hence, how can integration be achieved in the face of socio-cultural and structural diversities. The amalgamation of the Protectorate of Northern Nigeria with the colony and Protectorate of Southern Nigeria in 1914 by the British Colonial administration marked the commencement of the political entity called Nigeria and the need for interdependence of its component parts which gave birth to states and Local Government Area configuration. Ojong (2002) defines Local Government in line with Encyclopedia of Social Services, as "a territorial non sovereign community possessing the legal right and the necessary organ to regulate its own affairs, which presupposes the existence of a local authority with the power to act independently of external control as well as the participation of the local community in the administration of its own affairs through representation’’. In terms of Nigeria, local government is a political sub-division of a state in a Federal System of Government. A State according to Bhasin (1997:136) can be defined as a legal concept describing a social group that occupies a defined territory and is organized under a common political institution and an effective government. From this position, a state as used in Nigeria refers to a political subdivision of a country in a federal system of government. National Integration stemmed from the concept of Nation, which means a social group which shares a common ideology, common institutions, customs and sense of homogeneity. In the words of Bhasin (1997:136) a nation may comprise part of a state, be co-terminus with or extend beyond it. Simpson and Weiner (1989:231) defined a nation as ‘‘an extensive aggregate of persons so closely associated with each other by common descent, language, or history, as to form a distinct race, or people, usually organized as a separate political state and occupying a definite territory". It is Simpson and Weiner’s (1989) definition of nation that guides the discussion of states and local governments' creation as a strategy of National Integration in this paper. The basic task of nation-building is the act or process of integration of various sub-national and regional groups, and enthusing in them a unified identity so that they think of themselves as a nation- state. Simpson and Weiner (1989) define Integration as the making up or composition of a whole by adding together or combining the separate parts or elements, into an integral whole. It is also the bringing into equal membership of a common society groups or persons previously discriminated against on cultural grounds. The problem of integrating the diverse cultural diversity of Nigeria is very practical, and maintaining the existing level of integration is also a cumbersome task. The government over the years from colonial period tried to ward off fragmentation of Nigerian society and ensure unity of its component parts. One of the major strategies of national integration is creation of states and local government areas. The task of this paper is to determine if states and local governments' creation in Nigeria foster National Integration or disintegration. <!-,!#.23*<,*71'1,"$#4'5$52'-,*,"-!'*?,2#%02'-, National Integration is an aspect of Social Integration. Angel (1989) defined Social Integration as the getting together of the parts of a social system to constitute a whole. Angel (1989) identified four major types of social integration, namely; cultural integration, normative integration, communicative integration and functional integration. Cultural integration refers to consistency among cultural standards. Normative integration has to do with consistency between cultural standards and the conduct of persons. Communicative integration refers to the extent to which the network of communication permeates the social system, while functional integration refers to the degree to which there is mutual interdependence among the units of a system of division of labour. National integration is an all encompassing process of social integration, relying heavily on functional and communicative as well as cultural and normative elements of social integration. As 238 ISSN 2239-978X Journal of Educational and Social Research Vol. 3 (1) January 2013 noted by Merton in Angel (1989), in social integration, each part of a system contributes to the welfare of the whole and all parts makes reciprocal contributions to one another. Each part probably contributes a net balance of functional consciousness to the whole; but the dysfunctional consequences obscured by the net positive balance may render the relationship between particular parts beneficial or otherwise. Drawing analogy from a chemical plant, Merton explained that a chemical plant may bring prosperity by the wages it pays, may also pollute the air in a manner that endangers the health of patients in nearby hospitals and people in the vicinity. Deutsch (1957) focuses on communicative integration with overtones of both normative and functional integration. Deutsch (1957) studied social integration at the national level and attempted to throw light on the causes of high degree of integration among states that bring them together. Consequently, Deutsch (1957:5) defined national integration as the attainment within a territory of a 'sense of community' and of institutions and practices strong enough and widespread enough to assure, for a 'long' time dependable expectations of a 'peaceful change' among its population. Deutsch (1957:7) identified the following factors as indicators or National Integration: Mutual Sympathy; Loyalties; We-feelings; Trust and Mutual consideration; Partial identification in terms of self-images and interest; Mutually successful predictions of behaviour; and Co-operative action in accordance with such predictions. 2. Brief History of Local Government Areas and States Creation in Nigeria Local governments in Nigeria developed through a system of indirect rule as laid down by Lord Lugard, which was then autocratic and unrepresentative. The representative local government emanated from 1947 colonial secretary directive that indirect rule of native authority be replaced with representative governments in line with request from African intelligentia, (Ojah, 2005:95). Ojah (2005) explained that in Southern Nigeria native authorities were replaced with English style county or divisional, district or local council, in accordance with Local Government Law of 1952 which repealed the Local Government Ordinance of 1950. In the East the governing bodies were wholly elected, while in the West, three quarters were elected and one quarter titled members were nominated or selected. In the North the Native Authority Law of 1954 replaced the sole chief with the Chief-in-Council, while the traditional districts and villages groups remained as subordinate administrative organs of the Native Authority. The 1976 Local Government Reform was the standardization of the councils nation-wide. Ojah (2005) noted the objectives of the reform to include: 1. Bringing about even and rapid development at the local levels throughout the country. 2. Facilitating the exercise of democratic self-government close to the local levels of our society; 3. Encouraging initiative and leadership potentials of the local people; 4.